Cited by 120Liver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Use of HOMA-IR to diagnose non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a population-based and inter-laboratory study

Open access
Isokuortti, Elina, Zhou, You, Peltonen, Markku, Bugianesi, Elisabetta, Clement, Karine, Bonnefont-Rousselot, Dominique, Lacorte, Jean-Marc, Gastaldelli, Amalia +10 more·2017·Diabetologia

Abstract

Aims/hypothesis Recent European guidelines for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) call for reference values for HOMA-IR. In this study, we aimed to determine: (1) the upper limit of normal HOMA-IR in two population-based cohorts; (2) the HOMA-IR corresponding to NAFLD; (3) the effect of sex and PNPLA3 genotype at rs738409 on HOMA-IR; and (4) inter-laboratory variations in HOMA-IR.Methods We identified healthy individuals in two population-based cohorts (FINRISK 2007 [n = 5024] and the Programme for Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Finland [FIN-D2D; n = 2849]) to define the upper 95th percentile of HOMA-IR. Non-obese individuals with normal fasting glucose levels, no excessive alcohol use, no known diseases and no use of any drugs were considered healthy. The optimal HOMA-IR cut-off for NAFLD (liver fat ≥5.56%, based on the Dallas Heart Study) was determined in 368 non-diabetic individuals (35% with NAFLD), whose liver fat was measured using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1 H-MRS). Samples from ten individuals were simultaneously analysed for HOMA-IR in seven European laboratories.Results The upper 95th percentiles of HOMA-IR were 1.9 and 2.0 in healthy individuals in the FINRISK (n = 1167) and FIN-D2D (n = 459) cohorts. Sex or PNPLA3 genotype did not influence these values. The optimal HOMA-IR cut-off for NAFLD was 1.9 (sensitivity 87%, specificity 79%). A HOMA-IR of 2.0 corresponded to normal liver fat (<5.56% on 1 H-MRS) in linear regression analysis. The 2.0 HOMA-IR measured in Helsinki corresponded to 1.3, 1.6, 1.8, 1.8, 2.0 and 2.1 in six other laboratories. The inter-laboratory CV% of HOMA-IR was 25% due to inter-assay variation in insulin (25%) rather than glucose (5%) measurements.Conclusions/interpretation The upper limit of HOMA-IR in population-based cohorts closely corresponds to that of normal liver fat. Standardisation of insulin assays would be the first step towards definition of normal values for HOMA-IR.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00125-017-4340-1

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Insulin resistance can also be measured clinically with the HOMA-IR index from fasting insulin or C-peptide and fasting glucose concentrations, including in people with T2D unless on insulin treatment.

    “insulin resistance can also be measured clinically with the HOMA-IR index from fasting insulin or C-peptide and fasting glucose concentrations, including in people with T2D (unless on insulin treatment). 219 -221”

    From EASL-EASD-EASO Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). (2024) · cites this paper as [220]

    The Introduction defines HOMA-IR using fasting glucose and insulin and calls it a surrogate for insulin sensitivity in people without diabetes. It says HOMA-IR no longer exclusively reflects insulin sensitivity once glucose reaches the type 2 diabetes threshold; the Discussion likewise describes limitations in diabetic glucose tolerance. The cited passages do not support substituting C-peptide or establish insulin treatment as the only exception for people with T2D (page numbers unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Isokuortti, E., Zhou, Y., Peltonen, M., Bugianesi, E., Clement, K., Bonnefont-Rousselot, D., Lacorte, J.-M., Gastaldelli, A., Schuppan, D., Schattenberg, J. M., Hakkarainen, A., Lundbom, N., Jousilahti, P., Männistö, S., Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi, S., Saltevo, J., Anstee, Q. M., & Yki-Järvinen, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
  • Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (FI)
  • University of Turin (IT)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Istituto di Fisiologia Clinica (IT)
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Central Finland Health Care District (FI)
  • Freeman Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Isokuortti, Elina
Venue
Diabetologia
Published
2017-06-29
Volume
60
Issue
10
Pages
1873-1882
ISSN
  • 0012-186X (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0428
OpenAlex
W2728177312
Cited by
120
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3
FWCI
9.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
  • STM:n Hallinnonalan avoin julkaisuarkisto (Julkari) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
  • The Novo Nordisk Foundation
  • Suomen Akatemia
  • Paulon Säätiö
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (Grant Agreement 634413)
  • The Sigrid Juselius Foundation
  • Suomen Lääketieteen Säätiö
  • EU/EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (EMIF grant no. 115372)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, HOMA-IR, insulin resistance, reference values, upper limit of normal, diagnostic thresholds, PNPLA3 rs738409, sex differences, inter-laboratory variability, liver fat, 1H NMR, type 2 diabetes prevention
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Female, Humans, Insulin, Insulin Resistance, Liver, Male, Middle Aged, Reference Values, Adiposity, Young Adult, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized, Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review